Show me the Waze home —

Google Maps and Waze start swapping data

It has been just three months since Google's billion-dollar acquisition of Waze, and the two services are already mixing and matching their huge data sets.

Waze is a crowdsourced mapping application that specializes in traffic data. Users can submit information about accidents and road closures via Waze's mobile app; Waze compiles all that data and sends it out to other users. Google loves data, so the search giant bought the company last June.

We'll start with Google Maps for iOS and Android, which will now have access to the Waze community's road-condition reports. Any time a Waze user reports an accident, construction, road closure, or other event, that information will be beamed out to millions of Google Maps users. Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, France, Germany, Mexico, Panama, Peru, Switzerland, UK, and the US are the first to get the feature, and it will undoubtedly be brought over to the rest of Maps in due time.

And of course, Google being Google, it also added itself as a POI search provider for Waze alongside existing options like Yelp and Foursquare.

This sounds a whole lot like what Google originally envisioned when it bought Waze, saying, "We’re excited about the prospect of enhancing Google Maps with some of the traffic update features provided by Waze and enhancing Waze with Google’s search capabilities." So we have to wonder: is this the whole plan? What's the next step for Waze and Maps?

A big fear among Wazers was that their community would be destroyed after the Google acquisition or that they would be neglected while all the data was syphoned off into Google Maps, but Google seems to be going to great lengths to placate its new customers. With simultaneous updates and separate announcement posts that link back to each other, Waze and Maps are one big, happy family.

Ron Amadeo
Ron is the Reviews Editor at Ars Technica, where he specializes in Android OS and Google products. He is always on the hunt for a new gadget and loves to rip things apart to see how they work. Emailron.amadeo@arstechnica.com//Twitter@RonAmadeo

62 Reader Comments

They would be really stupid if they would kill it of. The worth of waze is the community and the skill to manage them. (interacting with people instead of algorithms is something Google is not really good at)

Every Google Maps functional update makes me question the continued existence of my (flagship-model) Garmin GPS more and more. And increasingly, it makes me wish for a day when in-car navigation systems just plain rely on Google Maps. Since ones based on Garmin or TomTom navigation have started to appear, hopefully the day I'm hoping for isn't far off.

It would be neat to be able to note traffic conditions and earn Waze points with Google Maps. I like those features of Waze but didn't like the clunky interface and navigation. Google's navigator voice is just more silky :-)

These are not the only changes which have taken place since the Google acquisition: As a Waze user, I have specifically observed a marked increase in the monetization of the Waze platform, through the increased use of ads. Some ads existed previously, but recent updates to the Waze app have expanded the methods that they use for injecting ads; I'm now seeing ads in more places and more frequently.

IMHO, this is part and parcel why existing Waze users were concerned by the buyout... and that concern has been proven at least partially justified.

@zarmanto which is why I'm glad there's more competition from Apple in this arena with Apple Maps. Though some people depise it, competition is still good nonetheless, and no one can argue that we'd be better off without Apple getting into the game and making Google try to up their game to keep ahead.

These are not the only changes which have taken place since the Google acquisition: As a Waze user, I have specifically observed a marked increase in the monetization of the Waze platform, through the increased use of ads. Some ads existed previously, but recent updates to the Waze app have expanded the methods that they use for injecting ads; I'm now seeing ads in more places and more frequently.

IMHO, this is part and parcel why existing Waze users were concerned by the buyout... and that concern has been proven at least partially justified.

When I used Waze more often, the only ads I saw (everywhere!) were Taco Bell. I don't eat there so it wasn't helping them to make any money and support their platform. I think that for better or worse, free services need to be supported somehow. Google has made a business of offering useful services and paying for them with what are essentially custom billboards. Compared to the old method of just blanketing everyone with ads in the hope that they will be relevant (and worth anything to the buyer or seller of ad space) I'll take a few ads that are more likely to apply to me based on my location, etc.

The other thing I look forward to is the improvement of Waze's editing engine. I gave myself so many headaches trying to submit edits to Waze and improve their maps but the combination of browser extensions and plugins needed to do edits never worked properly for me. If a Google merger means they can actually sustain their business and improve map editing/data then I think it's a net positive for Waze.

From the Google side, I look forward to the user-submitted data I love in Waze showing up on my Google Navigation app. The service was always good but with road conditions it will be excellent.

Can Google users report traffic that is then sent back to Waze yet? That is what I am waiting for since the number of people using Google Maps is much higher than the number using Waze at least here.

I have been using Waze since I first heard about them (I think on the forum here) about a year or 2 ago. The only change I have noticed since the buyout is that the voice on Waze sounds worse. It could (and probably is) just me but it doesn't sound as nice as it used to.

Waze and Google Maps/Nav are catering to different users. If Google killed Waze then a Waze replacement would arise. Better to just share data between the two - Waze can probably get more accurate traffic condition information by monitoring Google Maps/Nav users.

Every Google Maps functional update makes me question the continued existence of my (flagship-model) Garmin GPS more and more. And increasingly, it makes me wish for a day when in-car navigation systems just plain rely on Google Maps. Since ones based on Garmin or TomTom navigation have started to appear, hopefully the day I'm hoping for isn't far off.

It seems to me that the advantage of a dedicated GPS device over Google Maps or Waze is pretty obvious: All of the mapping data is stored locally, and doesn't have to be downloaded over a cellular connection. This is probably nice for those who want to avoid data overage charges -- but it can also be absolutely critical to someone who is driving (or hiking) cross country, where cellular connectivity may be limited or non-existent.

Unfortunately, the disadvantage of a dedicated GPS device is directly linked to that advantage... it's much harder to update maps on-the-fly, when they're all stored locally.

(Of course, there are hybridization/"best-of-both-worlds" kind of options, such as buying an app that caches everything to your smartphone, and can be updated via wifi... but I would speculate that users who do that are in a very small minority.)

When I used Waze more often, the only ads I saw (everywhere!) were Taco Bell. I don't eat there so it wasn't helping them to make any money and support their platform. ...

Not that this is directly related to my earlier post... but the conventional wisdom of advertising is that the very existence of an ad on your screen generates revenue, even if you don't click on it; in fact if you think about it, this is the entire foundation for television ads. (Of course, an ad obviously generates more revenue if you click on it... but technically, that isn't the argument you made.)

This is a nice feature to have in Google maps but I'd be more excited if the most recent update didn't suck quite as hard. What happened to the distance measuring tool? The onscreen zoom buttons for single-handed use? Caching tiles buried at the bottom of a very non-obvious search box? It feels like they want to provide a superb clean UI at the expense of features. Colour me unimpressed.

Every Google Maps functional update makes me question the continued existence of my (flagship-model) Garmin GPS more and more. And increasingly, it makes me wish for a day when in-car navigation systems just plain rely on Google Maps. Since ones based on Garmin or TomTom navigation have started to appear, hopefully the day I'm hoping for isn't far off.

It seems to me that the advantage of a dedicated GPS device over Google Maps or Waze is pretty obvious: All of the mapping data is stored locally, and doesn't have to be downloaded over a cellular connection. This is probably nice for those who want to avoid data overage charges -- but it can also be absolutely critical to someone who is driving (or hiking) cross country, where cellular connectivity may be limited or non-existent.

Unfortunately, the disadvantage of a dedicated GPS device is directly linked to that advantage... it's much harder to update maps on-the-fly, when they're all stored locally.

(Of course, there are hybridization/"best-of-both-worlds" kind of options, such as buying an app that caches everything to your smartphone, and can be updated via wifi... but I would speculate that users who do that are in a very small minority.)

Audi's latest navigation software does this. You get standard car sat nav for free, but for a monthly fee, you get Google maps and search data as well. I hope more car manufacturers go this route, as I'd prefer not to always dock my phone in the car, but I love my Google maps.

Audi's latest navigation software does this. You get standard car sat nav for free, but for a monthly fee, you get Google maps and search data as well. I hope more car manufacturers go this route, as I'd prefer not to always dock my phone in the car, but I love my Google maps.

interesting. i would prefer that i could dock my phone and it's interface would be reproduced on my car's screen (hopefully with touch screen input as well). that way i wouldn't need a monthly service to access stuff i can already get on my phone, just not in a safe manner while driving.

Google Maps (in the UK, presumable elsewhere too) has had a 'traffic' overlay for the last few years. Where were Google pulling this traffic data from before they acquired Waze?

I can't speak to the UK, of course, but in WA State there's been a system in place for well over a decade to provide similar data. Road sensors provide traffic flow patterns and the state provides the data in realtime for free to anyone. I'm sure this is hardly unique to this area.

Funnily enough, when I used to work at Microsoft years ago, many co-workers would come by my cube on the way out because I'd found a free program that pulled the data from the network and displayed it on my screen. It was the same thing the traffic reporters on the radio would use so they'd get commute info before leaving. Oddly, despite it being a free program anyone could have installed, they always popped by my cube. Weird ... /nostalgia

@zarmanto which is why I'm glad there's more competition from Apple in this arena with Apple Maps. Though some people depise it, competition is still good nonetheless, and no one can argue that we'd be better off without Apple getting into the game and making Google try to up their game to keep ahead.

LOL. I always love when people say this. There is no proof that any of Google Map's competitors is forcing Googe to to move forward. Google has always updated Maps. Maybe not in some rapid succession but it has occurred over the course of its history. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Maps Well before Apple Map's pile came onto the scene. Heck if anything its Microsoft's Bing Maps that keeps pushing Google forward. Apple Maps just shows Google how not to make a map app.

This is a nice feature to have in Google maps but I'd be more excited if the most recent update didn't suck quite as hard. What happened to the distance measuring tool? The onscreen zoom buttons for single-handed use? Caching tiles buried at the bottom of a very non-obvious search box? It feels like they want to provide a superb clean UI at the expense of features. Colour me unimpressed.

There is always going to be a conflict between a clean UI and lots of features. It's impossible to trim down the UI without losing some features. Google has to make the decision as to which features are most used, and keep those. I have to assume they have a lot of usage data to backup their choices (although perhaps I'm giving them too much credit).

PS. If you double-tap and drag your finger up/down, you can still zoom one-handed.

Every Google Maps functional update makes me question the continued existence of my (flagship-model) Garmin GPS more and more. And increasingly, it makes me wish for a day when in-car navigation systems just plain rely on Google Maps. Since ones based on Garmin or TomTom navigation have started to appear, hopefully the day I'm hoping for isn't far off.

Pioneer rolled this out last year and Waze (at least IOS) is already fully compatible. It's their AppRadio2/3 or the AVH-Xx500 model line.

Hook up your phone to the cable and waze plays out on the headunit with turn by turn navigation plays out on the car speakers. Waze is controlled via the touchscreen headunit which is Internet connected by the phone.

Every Google Maps functional update makes me question the continued existence of my (flagship-model) Garmin GPS more and more. And increasingly, it makes me wish for a day when in-car navigation systems just plain rely on Google Maps. Since ones based on Garmin or TomTom navigation have started to appear, hopefully the day I'm hoping for isn't far off.

It seems to me that the advantage of a dedicated GPS device over Google Maps or Waze is pretty obvious: All of the mapping data is stored locally, and doesn't have to be downloaded over a cellular connection. This is probably nice for those who want to avoid data overage charges -- but it can also be absolutely critical to someone who is driving (or hiking) cross country, where cellular connectivity may be limited or non-existent.

Unfortunately, the disadvantage of a dedicated GPS device is directly linked to that advantage... it's much harder to update maps on-the-fly, when they're all stored locally.

(Of course, there are hybridization/"best-of-both-worlds" kind of options, such as buying an app that caches everything to your smartphone, and can be updated via wifi... but I would speculate that users who do that are in a very small minority.)

Audi's latest navigation software does this. You get standard car sat nav for free, but for a monthly fee, you get Google maps and search data as well. I hope more car manufacturers go this route, as I'd prefer not to always dock my phone in the car, but I love my Google maps.

At Google IO they showed the 2014 Mercedes S class which has this as well. Except there were no monthly charges and was fully integrated into the experience.

It seems to me that the advantage of a dedicated GPS device over Google Maps or Waze is pretty obvious: All of the mapping data is stored locally, and doesn't have to be downloaded over a cellular connection. This is probably nice for those who want to avoid data overage charges -- but it can also be absolutely critical to someone who is driving (or hiking) cross country, where cellular connectivity may be limited or non-existent.

You can download maps on google. I downloaded pretty much the entire republic of ireland when I went over there because I wouldn't have a compatible cell signal. Back in the USA, I can download my whole state plus parts of 3 other states that I routinely drive through.

I'm interested in what countermeasures law enforcement will take when police locations go Google.

Waze and EscortLive already share police data from Live enabled police radar/ladar detectors. EscortLive gets the advantage though in that it provides additional data as to the frequency and band of radar/ladar being used.

It gives some early warning about police using laser based guns (usually if your radar detector alerts to laser, the officer already has your speed clocked).

If they don't get the data on google maps, they can get it on waze, EscortLive, trapster, or any number of other apps. About all they can do is hide better.

Waze integration is fine, but the Waze app has too much noise and many false positives. So, why would they integrated information that is misleading and often incorrect? Google would be better served by taking CHP (california highway patrol) sigalert and incident reporting information and graphically plotting it on to maps.

Every Google Maps functional update makes me question the continued existence of my (flagship-model) Garmin GPS more and more. And increasingly, it makes me wish for a day when in-car navigation systems just plain rely on Google Maps. Since ones based on Garmin or TomTom navigation have started to appear, hopefully the day I'm hoping for isn't far off.

It seems to me that the advantage of a dedicated GPS device over Google Maps or Waze is pretty obvious: All of the mapping data is stored locally, and doesn't have to be downloaded over a cellular connection. This is probably nice for those who want to avoid data overage charges -- but it can also be absolutely critical to someone who is driving (or hiking) cross country, where cellular connectivity may be limited or non-existent.

Unfortunately, the disadvantage of a dedicated GPS device is directly linked to that advantage... it's much harder to update maps on-the-fly, when they're all stored locally.

(Of course, there are hybridization/"best-of-both-worlds" kind of options, such as buying an app that caches everything to your smartphone, and can be updated via wifi... but I would speculate that users who do that are in a very small minority.)

Audi's latest navigation software does this. You get standard car sat nav for free, but for a monthly fee, you get Google maps and search data as well. I hope more car manufacturers go this route, as I'd prefer not to always dock my phone in the car, but I love my Google maps.

At Google IO they showed the 2014 Mercedes S class which has this as well. Except there were no monthly charges and was fully integrated into the experience.

Glad to see that a couple of manufacturers are already on top of this. Since we're a year behind Europe on VW/Audi releases, I'll keep an eye out for this feature next summer.

@zarmanto which is why I'm glad there's more competition from Apple in this arena with Apple Maps. Though some people depise it, competition is still good nonetheless, and no one can argue that we'd be better off without Apple getting into the game and making Google try to up their game to keep ahead.

Actually, the DOJ argued precisely this in its suit against Apple's pricing of e-books. You know, because causing an industry-wide drop in prices is so bad for consumers.

I'm interested in what countermeasures law enforcement will take when police locations go Google.

Waze and EscortLive already share police data from Live enabled police radar/ladar detectors. EscortLive gets the advantage though in that it provides additional data as to the frequency and band of radar/ladar being used.

It gives some early warning about police using laser based guns (usually if your radar detector alerts to laser, the officer already has your speed clocked).

If they don't get the data on google maps, they can get it on waze, EscortLive, trapster, or any number of other apps. About all they can do is hide better.

All true. All niche apps.

When it goes mainstream/ubiquitous/Google I expect issues.

Technically, its already illegal to report anything on a phone based gps while driving in California and with Waze dragging my icon across the screen while I drive it won't be too hard for a stationary leo to figure out who just gave his position away.

Every Google Maps functional update makes me question the continued existence of my (flagship-model) Garmin GPS more and more. And increasingly, it makes me wish for a day when in-car navigation systems just plain rely on Google Maps. Since ones based on Garmin or TomTom navigation have started to appear, hopefully the day I'm hoping for isn't far off.

One of the issues with GPS on phones that a stand-alone unit does not have is the continuous data link necessary for the GPS feature to function. Because the processing and map data is actually located on a server and not on the receiving unit, if the connection goes down, the GPS utility goes down. Friends of mine actually got lost because of this. They were driving to a camp in a remote area and the area had poor phone reception, so they lost the navigation through their phone that they were depending on.

Google Maps (in the UK, presumable elsewhere too) has had a 'traffic' overlay for the last few years. Where were Google pulling this traffic data from before they acquired Waze?

how fast their cellphones are moving....

You say that with a wink... but in reality, that's exactly how Waze works... and I imagine, if it doesn't already, Google Maps will soon incorporate that feature as well. In the case of Waze: if the app detects that your speed is abnormally slow for the road you're on, it asks you if you'd like to report a traffic problem. (Oddly, it makes no difference at all if you've already reported a traffic issue at your current location... It asks anyway. )

That said... I suspect that a more likely answer to psuedo's question would be that Google uses multiple sources for all of the different types of notifications within Maps. Waze is just another source, now.